4.8 Article

The Unfolded Protein Response Induces the Angiogenic Switch in Human Tumor Cells through the PERK/ATF4 Pathway

期刊

CANCER RESEARCH
卷 72, 期 20, 页码 5396-5406

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-0474

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Sharon and Lauren Daniels Cancer Research Fund
  2. University of Michigan, Office of the Provost
  3. NIH/NCI [P50-CA97248]
  4. NIH/NIDCR [R01-DE21139]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neovascularization is a limiting factor in tumor growth and progression. It is well known that changes in the tumor microenvironment, such as hypoxia and glucose deprivation (GD), can induce VEGF production. However, the mechanism linking GD to tumor growth and angiogenesis is unclear. We hypothesize that GD induces the angiogenic switch in tumors through activation of the unfolded protein response (UPR). We report that UPR activation in human tumors results in elevated expression of proangiogenic mediators and a concomitant decrease in angiogenesis inhibitors. cDNA microarray results showed that GD-induced UPR activation promoted upregulation of a number of proangiogenic mediators (VEGF, FGF-2, IL-6, etc.) and downregulation of several angiogenic inhibitors (THBS1, CXCL14, and CXCL10). In vitro studies revealed that partially blocking UPR signaling by silencing protein kinase RNA-like ER kinase (PERK) or activating transcription factor 4 (ATF4) significantly reduced the production of angiogenesis mediators induced by GD. However, suppressing the alpha subunit of hypoxia-inducible factors had no effect on this process. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) confirmed binding of ATF4 to a regulatory site in the VEGF gene. In vivo results confirmed that knockdown of PERK in tumor cells slows down tumor growth and decreases tumor blood vessel density. Collectively, these results show that the PERK/ATF4 arm of UPR mediates the angiogenic switch and is a potential target for antiangiogenic cancer therapy. Cancer Res; 72(20); 5396-406. (C) 2012 AACR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据